Within the past decade, humans have watched in awe as technology has improved exponentially, and learned to take on tasks once thought only humans could accomplish. Technology has been taught to communicate, entertain, solve problems, along with many other functions, and now it may be able to teach as well. Though we have made use of every technological advancement in the past, this may be one that we should not capitalize on. Before taking this enourmous step in technological advancement, humans must consider the flaws within this newly developed system, and whether we are ready to replace teachers with computers.

Though this new system is an astonishing feat in technology, people muct recognize the flaws within this system as well. As described in paragraph 6, a students facial expression has the power to change a lesson. If this is true, could a student not simply fake an emotion to get out of assignments or slack off by acting confused. The article claims that the software can pick up on fake smiles, but can it detect false expressions for other emotions as well? Another flaw within this system is the emotions the technology is capable of percieving, paragraph 6 disscusses the modification of a lesson based on boredom or confusion detected by the computer, however, neither of these two feelings are listed in the 6 emotions that the software is capable of detecting (paragraph 3). These two major flaws within the software lead to only one conclusion, the technology is simply not advanced enough to take on the role of a teacher.

Humans must also consider this issue from an ethical standpoint, are we ready to take away the role of teachers and replace them with software? Though machines have already taken away menial jobs, such as factory work, teaching is a career which requires a four year college degree and a license. Countless people aspire to become teachers, are we ready to take that away? Even if teachers were to work hand in hand with this technology there would still be flaws. Having a computer read the emotions of a student rather than a teacher would sever immportant student teacher ties, and cheat that student of the oppurtunity of a mentor relasionship. Because people are already capable of reading emotions, it would be foolish to replace that for a less precise piece of equipment. Because of the immportant role of teachers in the lives of students, the push for emotion detecting software in the classroom should be stopped.

Because of the major systematic flaws, and the ethical dilemas accompaniing this issue, it is clear that at least for the time being, the efforts to integrate emotion detecting software into the the cassroom should be put on hold. Though this is an astonishing advancement in technology, there is much to consider before pursuing this movement.